Today, I’m talking about porn. And…stuff.
Real handy as an excuse, porn is. Why, if it’s the porn’s fault that women are treated as lesser (to put it mildly), then nothing but the total eradication of porn needs to be done instead of changing individual behavior and systematic oppression! I think by blaming it on the porn it leaves people open to believe that everyone else is a decent hearted little soul who wouldn’t hurt a fly, only the nasty porn’s influence got in the way. To be overly broad.
I think if porn was at fault for the violence against women the world would’ve been butterflies and roses before television was invented. Because Lord knows it’s depicted that way, ain’t it. Since the time before clearly wasn’t a span of ‘Golden Years’ (despite claims to the contrary), I see the crappy side of porn being an offshoot of a larger problem.
Which isn’t a suprise, because there’s a crappy side to ’bout everything.
The crappy side housing drunk participants, illegal minors, racism, classism, ableism, all those nasty isms that are so bloody popular.
On a slightly different side of the fence there’s Porn vs. Erotica.
(I’m not linking them, you want ‘em, Google. Even went so far as to put a zero there so they don’t spam this blog to death. Trinity at The Strangest Alchemy already dealt with ‘em, I’ve no wish to engage. I just wanna rant a smidge. Is that so much to ask? Besides, they remind me of a virus.)
Anyway, I’m really, really disliking the “How the People Reclaimed Oklahoma City from a Major Eruption of Adult Businesses and Crime” article at N0PornNorthHampton dot com at the moment, among other lovely little pieces.
Funnily enough, I do have ‘expressed frustration with inadequate or biased coverage of porn issues.’
I used to work on one of my high school’s newspapers, way back when. Mainly taking questionaires and compiling statistics and small opinion pieces, but occasionally I’d get stuck rewriting an article that someone handed in that Da Boss didn’t like. She did have impeccable taste, though, and I was the fastest at typing, so no grudges. Well, mostly. After two hours of constant typing, your fingers cramp somethin’ horrid. Bit of a slave driver, and no breaks, because she watched you. Try and take a two minute break and a head of grey would suddenly appear over your shoulder, asking how it’s coming and when you’d be done, because oh, here’s that piece on the game, and it needs to be typed up in the next fifteen minutes.
So anyway, when that little line that jumped out at me from the article, I almost pissed myself laughing. Because ‘factual’ newspaper articles are almost always partisan, they all have a slant. Hell, even if the article only listed statistics with a miniscule overview of what those statistics represent it would have a slant, due to how those statistics were most probably compiled.
Go self-censorship, inadequate questionaires and deliberate blindess!
We love you!!
Not.
But the articles listed on that webpage were written at such an angle I’d be suprised if whomever typed it up wasn’t sniggering quietly in the corner. Because they had to know what they were creating angles, there’s no way to miss it. Therefore, to claim to be irritated with the abundance of angles when producing a huge one themselves is hypocritical. Come on, people, at least admit it. I won’t point and argue nearly as much as long as it’s admitted, honest.
I’m also curious as to where they’d draw the line between porn and erotica. According to Tommy Devine, Playboy is erotica. But I’ve read and heard several dissenting opinions that run the gamut from feminists to extremely conservative people on the Right (politically and morally, as much as that means anything) that I see such disagreements ending in flame wars and vicious, no holds barred personal attacks. I don’t think it’s anywhere near a clear cut line, it seems to be more in various hues of grey. What’s dehumanizing to a couple may be perfectly acceptable behavior to another couple. There’d have to be some all-knowing and most probably self-appointed, heh, judge, with a scythe and a set of scales to decide what’s porn and what’s erotica.
Pornography is a term reserved for the type of sexual images that treat woman as though they were objects, as if women existed for no other purpose but to be used for pleasure, even if that pleasure involves degradation and even violence. And it isn’t just women, in looking into the mysteries surrounding former teen star Stephen Geoffreys, I’ve discovered that gay male porn is just as bad…
Degradation and violence, apparently, is the difference between porn and erotica. Oh, and objectification. We’ll get to the latter in a moment.
Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but degradation is in the eye of the beholder. And correct me if I’m wrong (again) but some people get off on participating in that very degradation.
So if it’s consensual, who, exactly, is being violated? Hrm?
Oh, that’s right. People who don’t want to view, read or participate in such ‘degradation.’
Well then, turn around and walk/wheel/shuffle/slink/hop/skip away. Not that hard, really. Don’t like it, don’t watch, participate or read.
As for objectification, it tends to be a nasty thing.
But there’s always a but. Especially here.
People don’t share a psychic consciousness insofar as they believe what every other person believes. Everyone objectifies to some extent. I’m not saying it’s good, but I’m not saying it’s always bad, either. I’mthinking sometimes it’s inevitable, and it just is.
Take ‘erotica’, for instance. You just popped a disk in the dvd player, a tape in the vcr, or plugged into the good ‘ole World Wide Web. Or even, gasp, opened a book. (reflecting on America’s lack of love for the printed word, makes me teary eyed.)
Then the scenes (or words) start to roll. How, exactly, do you only focus on someone’s humanity, on their worth as a human being, when the only time you see them is when you’re horny? You can believe they have human worth and still be objectifying. It isn’t black and white, again, it’s various shades of grey.
They certainly don’t show their life goals, their likes and dislikes or the pain/joys that comes in life in erotica/porn. Not the visuals I’ve seen, anyway, and certainly not in-depth when I do see it written.
Probably because someone’s life story isn’t the goal of erotica/porn.
So Do Tell, I’m curious. What about erotica exemplifies someone’s humanity so much that it cancels out the sex? Because I think that’s what some people are going for, really.
“Sure, there’s ~sex~ but look!! They *love* each other, so it’s all right! It’s like the sex isn’t even taking place, they could just as well be having a double mocha latte with their partner!”
Is it having the people in the film or book doing something you’d do, or something you fantasize about?
By Jove, I think that’s the answer! I don’t know if it’s the complete answer, but I’m damn positive it’s a very large chunk. Call it a hunch.
You consider yourself human, or at least I hope you do. Porn/erotica is a type of projection where you can, conceivably, put yourself in another’s place. Who wants to put themselves in a place they don’t want to go? Nobody, unless they dislike themselves. Therefore, what some people don’t want to experience or see is inhumane, objectification. The bad kind, not the is-there kind people don’t want to admit to.
I dare you the next time you get hold of some erotica to focus on the person(s) humanity, their possible likes and dislikes, their goals and their history, and make it look nothing like your own instead of them being a fairly blank slate.
Use your imagination.
Go on, try it.
I’d like to know how far you (general you again) get before the people on the screen go back into being projected upon, to one extent or another.
‘Erotica’ bears a striking resemblance to ‘porn’, seems to me.
Almost missed this in the comments section there.
We distinguish porn, which is generally harmful, from erotica, which can be harmless or even beneficial. The distinction is not absolute, but we suggest that erotica is that which supports love, and porn is that which destroys love.
I didn’t and don’t think love is the goal every time someone gets off. Which is what I (apparently erroniously) assume porn/erotica is for. The site and it’s articles and submissions also seem to be centered on two-person couplings, which boots a lot of pairings to the side, another thing there I’m not fond about.
I used to have several erotica books. No, really! Picked them up from Barnes & Noble and everything. They even claimed to be erotica!
Decent writers, too. I think it was the 1995, 1998, and 2001 edition of something-or-other, I’ll have to hunt ‘em up again and find out. But anyway, I remember a lot of those stories. I saw ’support of love’ in a few of them, that is, where people had monogamous, long term relationships. What I mostly read was attraction, gentleness, roughness, different forms of objectification, a bit of SM, some consent where characters pretended not to consent, and quite a bit of leather and lace. One story even had a wine stain that played an important role. But little love.
I think the writers at N0PornNorthampton are projecting themselves, on erotica no less.
I wonder what they’re viewing/reading where it supports love.
Edited to add a mild dig at erotica being radically different than porn, and that eventually I’ll get to nattering on about role-playing, but not today.
~Just occured to me to make a clarification. I haven’t seen mainstream porn in a few years, and what I mostly remember from it was bad acting and quite a bit of sexism. Really, really bad acting. Was almost painful to watch, the laughter came so hard.
Like to explain that I’m not talking about most mainstream erotica/porn, because quite frankly I’m not that familiar with it. But hey, I could take a wild guess at what a chunk of it probably contains. (wild guess leaning heavily towards oodles of objectionable stereotypes)
I’m much more familiar with the literature side of porn/erotica, which I’ll admit to considering superior cuz it tells you exactly what the author means to say, instead of leaving it up to someone’s eyes to judge for themselves where the wrong message gets taken away. Much less confusion when it’s written well. S’a reason I think visual media is much more dangerous than other kinds.